This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

Shocking that Ivy league admins aren't keen to investigate by Barrister

members of their own club.

Wasn't the president of Stanford just ousted over research misconduct?

I guess my point is, if the misconduct is there, then I don't really care who brings it to light. Human nature suggests to me that critics or competitors are more likely to (a) go looking and (b) go public if they find wrongdoing.

(ETA: Should the Michigan cheating scandal be discounted because Ohio State was first to raise the alarm?)

I have no problem with that. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Perhaps Harvard should've done their homework during the hiring/search process - this could have been avoided.